Intolerance is a virtue?

Tolerance is a virtue and intolerance is hate, or so we are told. This ideology has led to the toleration of evil. After all, who wants to be a hater? Those who condemn the evil caused by the doctrine of political Islam are called intolerant and haters.
But we must realize that intolerance of evil is a virtue.
Things to be intolerant of: killing Christians and Yazidis in the Middle East and Africa; jihad of rape, inbreeding, child marriage and female genital mutilation.

Tolerance is the virtue of a man without convictions.

Tolerance & apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.

Post navigation

5 thoughts on “Intolerance is a virtue?”

The problem with tolerance is who decides what is acceptable and what is not? As a Christian I cannot condone homosexuality or adultery, theft, drunkenness and a multitude of other immoral acts that the bible calls sin. If I declare my position on these issues I am howled down. I am not tolerated by those who call me intolerant! The irony of this generally escapes those who disagree with me. Islam also does not tolerate many of the moral offences that the bible calls sin. Their moral code is drawn from the Old Testament. However, I do not call for capital punishment, cutting off hands for theft, whipping for adultery etc. Jesus Christ introduced the New Testament, which is grace and truth, not the Law of the Old Testament. Islam misappropriated both the Old and New testaments and puts Jesus Christ as inferior to Mohamed. If nothing else that is the greatest character slur in the history of mankind. There is as much in common between these two as there is between Ghandi and Adolf Hitler. I’d love to take an 18c case against Islam. It is highly offensive to me and needs to be silenced!

Further to your comment: “Islam misappropriated both the Old and New testaments and puts Jesus Christ as inferior to Mohamed”.

According to Luke 1:35 the angel Gabriel said to Mary:

“The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you: wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God”

This is denied by Islam, Sura 112:1-4:

“He is God, The One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, Nor is He begotten; And there is none Like unto Him”.

Two salient points apply: First, from the Bible in Luke, the unequivocal declaration that Jesus is the Son of God. Second, this testimony came from the angel Gabriel.

However, according to the Qur’an, Sura 2.97: It was Jibreel (Gabriel) who brought the revelation of God to Mohammed.

So, who to believe: Gabriel’s testimony in Luke 1 which clearly contradicts what he is alleged to have said in the Qur’an. Or the Qur’an’s version?

Either the Bible, or the Qur’an, is in error. Which?

It is well known that Mahommed plagiarised the Old and new Testaments and the Torah. Some of the most incriminating evidence is the historical fact that New Testament verses such as those found in the Gospel of Luke were written around AD 55. Wheras Mahommed was allegedly inspired to formulate the Qur’an by the angel Gabriel around 600 years later.

The hudud laws under the shari’a are a far cry from what we call a moral code. Yes, there’s an eye for an eye and stoning in the OT, but that was already superseded by the time Jesus appeared. If you are interested, here’s more: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/capital-punishment

May I quote the great Karl Popper, on the Paradox of Tolerance: ‘Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.’ So it’s even worse than Dr. Bill Warner says it is. Unlimited ‘tolerance’ will literally kill us, and Western Civilisation as well.